Harry Reid’s gambit

He once called the “nuclear option” an “un-American” move that would destroy the Senate and “ruin our country.”

But on Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid did it anyway. He took the unprecedented step of gutting Senate filibuster rules for presidential nominees on a straight party-line vote, a high-stakes gambit that could have enormous implications for future presidents, reshape an institution he’s served in for 26 years, and ultimately define Reid’s legacy as one of the longest-serving Democratic leaders in history — one with a penchant for bare-knuckled tactics.

Text Size

-

+

reset

Reid: Senate must evolve

McConnell: Dems creating "fake fight"

On the weekend of Nov. 9, Reid enlisted his top lieutenants, Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Dick Durbin of Illinois, to help take the caucus’ temperature. But after several weeks of counting votes, Reid was still encountering skepticism even among his confidants as late as Monday evening. He bucked up his troops ahead of the hugely controversial move.

“This is the right thing to do,” Reid told one of his closest advisers. “If I don’t do this, I might as well just walk away.”

As some of his fellow Democratic senators remained on the fence, Reid called in a heavy hitter to close the deal: President Barack Obama, according to sources familiar with the matter. Obama personally called senators on Wednesday to back the move, and Reid ultimately won the vote on a slim margin, 52-48. Just three Democrats broke with Reid: the retiring Carl Levin of Michigan, the moderate Joe Manchin of West Virginia and the vulnerable Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

When the seismic moment finally came, shell-shocked senators in both parties couldn’t believe that Reid pulled the trigger — and were grasping to understand the far-reaching ramifications.

Asked how history would remember him after this move, Reid told POLITICO: “I don’t write history.”

But nobody disputed that the move was emblematic of Reid’s hard-ball style that has come to characterize his leadership in recent years — whether it was his passage of the health care law in 2009 on a straight party-line vote, his willingness to go over the fiscal cliff in 2012 or his refusal to bend to GOP demands during the 16-day government shutdown last month.

Reid’s decision to sharply reverse course speaks to how the majority leader’s views have shifted to reflect his younger, more liberal caucus — whether the subject is immigration, gun control, gay marriage or filibuster reform. It also signals that the growing crop of Senate Democrats who have never served a day in the minority party now wield enormous clout with Reid, who has evolved from being an outspoken opponent of the nuclear option, to a reluctant supporter, to one of its staunchest proponents.

No longer concerned about the political fallout, Reid simply believed that the timing was right to make the change after Republicans blocked Obama’s judicial picks — and, conveniently, as Democrats were on the defensive over Obamacare.

The latest move left Republicans howling in protest and warning that Reid would ultimately come to regret it.

Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina called Reid “a puppet of the president.” Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said he was acting like a “bully.”And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Reid had broken his word that he “never, ever” would go this route.

Indeed, for decades, Senate majority leaders have avoided using the manuever for fear that future majority parties would continually weaken — and eventually eliminate — the filibuster. The complicated parliamentary tactic known as the “nuclear option” allows the Senate to set a new precedent by a simple majority of 51 senators, rather than the typical 67 votes that are needed to change the rules by regular order. That means any majority can fundamentally weaken the filibuster without consensus of the minority party, effectively weakening its ability to block, delay or shape legislation.

Under the new rules, senators can no longer filibuster nominees to executive branch posts or the courts, with the exception of the Supreme Court. Legislation could still be filibustered, as could many other Senate actions.

But both sides readily acknowledge that future majorities will cite Reid’s precedent to continue to weaken the filibuster, potentially ending the delaying tactic on all bills and Supreme Court nominees and allowing a simple majority of senators to work their will. In essence, the Senate could become a replica of the majority-rules House.

“Good, let him do it,” Reid said when asked about McConnell’s threats to change the rules further if he becomes majority leader.

Frustrated by gridlock, Democrats said it was about time to take that step — no matter what it means for the future of the institution. But it may only perpetuate the gridlock and could usher in a sweeping conservative agenda the next time the GOP returns to power.

Both sides have reason to complain: The GOP points out that Reid blocked their amendments more than any other majority leader; Democrats say Republicans have used and abused the filibuster.